News Update

KGST - As is trite law, a suit filed prior has to be adjudicated so as to bar a suit filed subsequently & that doctrine of res judicata is inapplicable without a previous adjudication: HCGST - Adjournment was granted for two weeks but the proper officer passed the orders before the period was over - Orders set aside and matter remanded: HCGST - Shipping bill can be considered as an application for refund of IGST in terms of rule 96: HCGST - Petitioner is permitted to pay amounts assessed in 24 equal monthly instalments together with interest - Recovery proceedings to be kept in abeyance: HCGST - S.80 - Instalment facility granted to pay defaulted tax - If petitioner commits any default in payment of even a single instalment, it is open to respondents to proceed for recovery: HCGST - Allegation is that petitioner availed ITC in contravention of s.16 - Petitioner submits that they paid output tax without utilising ITC in question - Matter remanded: HCCBDT issues transfer order of 17 Addl / JCITsPMLA - Statement given by accused, while under custody in PMLA case to investigating officers of ED incriminating oneself in another money laundering case would be inadmissible in evidence: SC (See 'TIOLCorplaws')CBDT promotes 6 IRS officers as CCITThe making of an 'Input Service Distributor'President Murmu unwraps new Insignia and flag of Supreme Court of IndiaCBIC amends Sea Cargo Manifest & Transshipment Regulations‘Kavach’ system to be deployed in mission mode: Rail MantriI-T - Re-assessment cannot be commenced when there is no failure on assessee's part to make full and true disclosure of material facts during original assessment: HCHeavy rains in AP & Telangana; 26 NDRF teams deployedMoS unveils New Single Unified Pension Form for Senior CitizensGST mop-up in August month rises to Rs 1.75 lakh croreI-T - Issue as to whether or not there was in fact a suppression, is question of fact that has to be determined by AO/ DRP before whom assessee has admittedly filed his objections, and cannot lie before writ court: HCPresident Murmu says Culture of adjournment needs to be amended for speedier justiceIndia Post Payments Bank providing financial inclusion to remote areas17 killed in Russian copter crashI-T - Amount paid by assessee for obtaining mining rights in e-auctions, can be countenanced as income of assessee: HCOMCs hike LPC cylinders cost by Rs 39India, Malaysia ink MoU for strengthening Cooperation in Tourism sectorFire at fireworks factor in TN - 2 killed & 4 injuredI-T- Theory of human behaviour and preponderance of probabilities cannot be cited as a basis to turn a blind eye to the evidence produced by respondent: ITATIndia-China 1962 war era smoke bomb found in Assam; Cops safely defuse itMandaviya calls for transparent System for EPF DeductionsForbes ranks Princeton Univ as No 1 in USCX - The provisions of Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 are not applicable for deposit lying in PLA account for refund and same is to be treated as deposit: CESTAT
 
New Litigation Policy to focus on making Govt responsible litigant: Law Minister

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, MAY 20, 2015: THE Minister for Law and Justice, Mr D. V. Sadananda Gowda, has said that the National Litigation Policy, 2015 aims to suggest mechanism to reduce the Government litigation and to make Government as an Efficient and Responsible litigant. He was responding to concerns of the Members of the Consultative Committee of the Parliament attached to his Ministry on the framing of National Litigation Policy, 2015 which was the Agenda Item for the meeting held today. 

The Minister said that the policy suggest mechanism to reduce filing of cases by or against the Government. It also aims to transform Government as an Institution which does not believe in entering into unnecessary and avoidable litigation in the courts by taking appropriate steps at pre-litigation stage itself. 

During the meeting members of the Committee Mr Kalyan Bannerjee and Mr Ayannur Manjunath , said there is dire need to change the Arbitration system and emphasized that there should be a fixed time frame for any Arbitration. They also vouched for the cost effectiveness of the entire process. The members stressed action against the government counsels for their casual approach during the litigation process and said that a provision for submitting the status report of court cases by the Nodal officers to the head of departments on regular basis. The Member also persisted for the availability of WiFi facility in various High Courts and subordinate Courts. The Minister while agreeing with the members said that there concerns will be taken care of. 

A Presentation were also made during the meeting to highlight the need to have a litigation Policy in which it was shown that due to the very high number of pending court cases in different courts this has become utmost necessary. More over the need to reduce Government Litigation in courts so that valuable court time would be spent in resolving other pending cases. In its 126th Report on “Government and Public Sector Undertaking Litigation Policy and Strategies”, the Law Commission has also expressed the need of having a Litigation Policy to avoid litigation or reduce it at any cost which will bring down the load on the court system resulting in reduction of expenses on judicial set up. 

During the meeting Minutes and ATR (Action Taken Report) of the last meeting of the Consultative Committee meeting held on 15th December, 2014 were also ratified which comprised the agenda items regarding e-Courts/ Computerizations of Courts and Repeal of obsolete and redundant Laws. 

Earlier the Ministers welcomed the Members and gave details of the passing of two bills in the Parliament out of the four tabled bills.


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Litigation - why Government want to litigate - though responsibily

Dear Sir,

It does not give comfort to the citizens (here I would assume the citizen as TAXPAYER community to large extent) that the Government would LITIGATE. This idea of litigation stands on the premise that there are two oppositions whereas the tax payers and Government are both work for the single purpose and one is the payer and other is collector.

I would quote from the Kautilya's Arthashashtra - the tax should be collected in a manner that the payer does not feel the pinch or not mind paying but enjoys.

How this could be achieved is the need today?

Why not some out of BOX ideas - leaving the legacies behind - with a theme that there would not be any litigation? laws should simple (written in simple language), clear in intent - not like the present day notifications (refer the recent notifications issued after the enactment of finance bill - which starts with referring to the clauses of the finance bill and then the rules - "remove the word 'a" from the second para of the sub-section 3 of the proviso i of the clause 107 etc - how difficult is this to link all the notifications to their origin or original rules/acts etc) and language " it is in public interest to do so etc? is there no way to change the "geography" of these notifications with simple and easy to connect language.

In fact such language clubbed with the "adversarial" attitude is the root cause of litigation and the political masters came to know the small part of the problem when it impacts the "FDI" industry. The general desi community (manufacturers, service providers etc) are not heard generally.

The example of responsible litigant is that even after the decisions from the judicial forums, the same issue is litigated again and again either by differentiating the earlier decisions on flimsy grounds or by issuing circulars or lastly by amending the law retrospectively.

I just wonder whether the TARC report has been read/seen by the political leadership? that report throws some light on thus aspect also besides other important matters.

Now we have the Shah Commission - another commission - why not clear the air by "intent" whether want to tax or not? If no tax going forward - why look backward - one more amendment and all will be cleared. By the way the amount is also reduced from 50000 crores to just 600 crores.

The directive of the State Policy should be kept in mind - even if the corporate/companies fight the cases - it is the individual citizen of India who does all the hard working to prepare all the details/data and lots of time and paper (refer my last write up on the litigation - how much paper is wasted as a result of EA 2000 Audit and after wards - just to collect five lakh rupees each year).

Arbind Aggarwal

Posted by Arbind Aggarwal
 
Sub: vexatious litigation in steam coal import

the case by the department against steam coal importers is based on interpretation of classification contrary to Apex court direction. the moist mineral calorific value is calculated contrary to example calculation in ASTM-D388, which the department also relied. in our tariff coking coal is shown as division of subbituminous coal which itself is wrong because coke can be made only from bituminous coal

Posted by julian andrew
 

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube brings you an interview with former US Secretary of Treasury, Mr. Larry Summers who was recently in Delhi.



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.